Vers. 2.3 travel model, trip generation: Development of trip production model

Similar documents
Mobile Area Transportation Study Urban Area and Planning Boundary

APPLICATION OF A PARCEL-BASED SUSTAINABILITY TOOL TO ANALYZE GHG EMISSIONS

Transit Modeling Update District One Implementation & Status Report. Purpose and Need

ConnectGreaterWashington: Can the Region Grow Differently?

Transportation Statistical Data Development Report BAY COUNTY 2035 LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Wellington Transport Strategy Model. TN19.1 Time Period Factors Report Final

Travel Demand Modeling at NCTCOG

Office of Transportation Bureau of Traffic Management Downtown Parking Meter District Rate Report

City of Jacksonville Mobility Fee Update

Developing a Toll Demand Model for DelDOT s Statewide Travel Demand Model

Air Quality Impacts of Advance Transit s Fixed Route Bus Service

Appendix F Model Development Report

[Report Title] [Report Tag Line]

Development of the Idaho Statewide Travel Demand Model Trip Matrices Using Cell Phone OD Data and Origin Destination Matrix Estimation

Travel Forecasting Methodology

The Value of Travel-Time: Estimates of the Hourly Value of Time for Vehicles in Oregon 2007

Sepulveda Pass Corridor Systems Planning Study Final Compendium Report. Connecting the San Fernando Valley and the Westside

Do U.S. Households Favor High Fuel Economy Vehicles When Gasoline Prices Increase? A Discrete Choice Analysis

Appendix E: Transportation Modeling

OmniWeb With Knowledge Panel

VEHICLE OCCUPANCY DETERMINATORS

CLRP. Performance Analysis of The Draft 2014 CLRP. Long-Range Transportation Plan For the National Capital Region

CO 2 Emissions from Cars, Trucks & Buses in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Subarea Study. Manning Avenue (CSAH 15) Corridor Management and Safety Improvement Project. Final Version 1. Washington County.

Mountain Area Transportation Study Model Methodology and Assumptions Final

National Household Travel Survey Add-On Use in the Des Moines, Iowa, Metropolitan Area

2.1 Outline of Person Trip Survey

MAKING USE OF MOBILE6 S CAPABILITIES FOR MODELING START EMISSIONS

2012 Air Emissions Inventory

Application of EMME3 and Transportation Tomorrow Survey (TTS) for Estimation of Zonal Time Varying Population Density Distribution in

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS MODEL SBTAM

The USDOT Congestion Pricing Program: A New Era for Congestion Management

Michigan/Grand River Avenue Transportation Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM #18 PROJECTED CARBON DIOXIDE (CO 2 ) EMISSIONS

Table of Contents. 1.0 Introduction Demographic Characteristics Travel Behaviour Aggregate Trips 28

DEVELOPMENT OF RIDERSHIP FORECASTS FOR THE SAN BERNARDINO INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT STUDY

U.S. Census Bureau News Joint Release U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

WMATA CONNECTGREATERWASHINGTON

Transit Vehicle (Trolley) Technology Review

Travel Time Savings Memorandum

Interstate Operations Study: Fargo-Moorhead Metropolitan Area Simulation Output

CALIFORNIA MOTOR VEHICLE STOCK, TRAVEL AND FUEL FORECAST

MPO Staff Report Technical Advisory Committee: July 12, 2017

MONTHLY NEW RESIDENTIAL SALES, APRIL 2017

HALTON REGION SUB-MODEL

Vehicle Miles Traveled in Massachusetts: Who is driving and where are they going?

David Leard, Edward Potthoff, Andrew de Garmo and Kevin Welch

MONTHLY NEW RESIDENTIAL SALES, SEPTEMBER 2018

DRP DER Growth Scenarios Workshop. DER Forecasts for Distribution Planning- Electric Vehicles. May 3, 2017

Ambient PM 10 Monitoring Sechelt, B.C Update

The proposed Escondido Village Graduate Student Housing project would include the following features:

BENCHMARK SURVEY 2013

U.S. Census Bureau News Joint Release U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Building a Database for Estimation of an Advanced Activity-Based Travel Model from the NHTS

Fueling Savings: Higher Fuel Economy Standards Result In Big Savings for Consumers

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

Brake Pad Copper Reduction - Metrics for Tracking Progress

MONTHLY NEW RESIDENTIAL SALES, AUGUST 2017

Forecast Allocation Methodology. Kitsap 10-Year Update Kitsap County August 2006; Updated November 2006

Can Public Transportation Compete with Automated and Connected Cars?

Yonge-Eglinton. Mobility Hub Profile. September 19, 2012 YONGE- EGLINTON

2030 Multimodal Transportation Study

TEXAS CITY PARK & RIDE RIDERSHIP ANALYSIS

TPB CLRP Aspirations Scenario

Predicted response of Prague residents to regulation measures

Inflation: the Value of the Pound

Internal Audit Report. Fuel Consumption Oversight and Coordination TxDOT Internal Audit Division

U.S. Census Bureau News Joint Release U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

U.S. Census Bureau News Joint Release U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTS

AGENDA ITEM 1: IMPROVED BPM FORECASTING WITH OUT OF REGION ANALYSIS (ORA)

Who has trouble reporting prior day events?

2.2 Informal activities

KANSAS Occupant Protection Observational Survey Supplementary Analyses Summer Study

Public Transit in America:

2002 Travel Demand Forecast Model Calibration Report for Ada and Canyon Counties

Transit in Bay Area Blueprint

State Highway 32 East TIGER Discretionary Grant Application APPENDIX C - BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS REPORT

Improving Accessibility of Regional Bus Stops and Pathways

Large Sample Ecodriving Experiment Preliminary Results

September 22, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board

Transportation and Energy

MONTHLY NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION, NOVEMBER 2017

Table of Contents for TAC Agenda for November 8, Table of Contents Page 1. Agenda Pages 2 3. Green Business update Pages 4 23

Appendix J Traffic Impact Study

Transportation Demand Management January 25, 2017 Waterfront Plan Transportation Working Group. Date & Location

Jeffrey Busby A/Director, Infrastructure Program Management TransLink Urban Sustainability Accelerator

Performance Measure Summary - Washington DC-VA-MD. Performance Measures and Definition of Terms

WLTP DHC subgroup. Draft methodology to develop WLTP drive cycle

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...1 INTRODUCTION...3 PROJECTED FUTURE GROWTH...3 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS...4 POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES...

Shared Mobility: Past, Present, and Future. Susan Shaheen, PhD Twitter: SusanShaheen1 LinkedIn: Susan Shaheen

11 October 12, 2011 Public Hearing APPLICANT:

4 COSTS AND OPERATIONS

PHILADELPHIA SUBURBAN RAIL SUMMARY (COMMUTER RAIL, REGIONAL RAIL)

NEW YORK CITY CARSHARE PILOT

May 1, SUBJECT: Demand Forecasting and the Transportation Sector

Annual Report on National Accounts for 2015 (Benchmark Year Revision of 2011) Summary (Flow Accounts)

Alpine Highway to North County Boulevard Connector Study

MONTHLY NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION, FEBRUARY 2017

MONTHLY NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION, JULY 2017

Sustainable Urban Transport Index (SUTI)

Transcription:

TFS item #4a Vers. 2.3 travel model, trip generation: Development of trip Presented to the Travel Forecasting Subcommittee of the TPB Technical Committee September 17, 2010 Mark Moran, TPB staff National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (TPB) Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG) devel_of_v23_trip_prod_v4.pptx

Acknowledgements Analysis performed by Hamid Humeida Production assistance by Mary Martchouk 2

Background As described in the previous presentation, prior to trip generation, demographic models are used to disaggregate zonal HHs into 4 household income groups 4 household size groups (1, 2, 3, 4+ persons) 4 vehicle availability groups (0, 1, 2, and 3+ vehicles available) Sub-allocation is made at the TAZ level Trip generation models applied to compute daily person trip productions and attractions by purpose Trip rates reflect both motorized and non-motorized trips Since trip distribution and mode choice address only motorized person trips, a model is used to separate the two groups of trip ends (discussed later today): non-motorized trip end model 3

Background Trip production Cross-classification model Total person trips (motorized and non-motorized) for all trip purposes home-based work (HBW), home-based shop (HBS), home-based other (HBO), non-home-based work (NHW), and non-home-based other (NHO) 4

Background Most cross-classification trip s use HH size and a wealth variable, e.g., HH income or vehicle availability. Example: Automobile Ownership HH Size 0 1 2+ 1 1.19 2.57 1.70 2 1.43 3.16 2.17 3 1.45 4.55 4.74 4+ 2.02 4.40 5.05 Graphic from Urban Transportation Planning, Meyer & Miller, 1984. We are using two wealth variables In Ver. 2.2, TD is income stratified and MC is stratified by vehicle availability In Ver. 2.3, both TD & MC are income stratified, but we have continued to stratify by vehicle availability, since this is such an important policy variable 5

Existing trip HBW Trip Production Rates, 1994 HTS Vehicles Income Level HH Size 0 1 2 3+ Sub- Total 1 1 0.69 0.85 0.75 0.96 0.79 2 1.08 1.08 1.41 1.41 1.22 3 1.10 1.52 1.94 1.94 1.66 4+ 1.66 1.66 1.94 1.94 1.81 Subtotal 0.91 1.07 1.58 1.74 1.20 2 1 1.02 1.18 1.30 1.53 1.17 2 1.35 1.35 1.53 2.12 1.53 3 1.66 1.66 1.79 2.12 1.85 4+ 1.85 1.85 2.05 2.43 2.10 Subtotal 1.21 1.34 1.73 2.23 1.61 3 1 1.02 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.20 2 1.46 1.46 1.84 2.15 1.77 3 1.66 1.66 2.02 3.02 2.36 4+ 2.30 2.30 2.30 3.08 2.55 Subtotal 1.31 1.46 2.03 2.87 2.04 4 1 1.33 1.33 1.33 2.00 1.34 2 1.45 1.45 1.84 2.15 1.80 3 1.67 1.67 2.02 3.02 2.43 4+ 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.36 3.35 Subtotal 1.67 1.72 2.34 3.05 2.42 TOTAL 1.05 1.33 2.02 2.72 1.85 Estimated from the 1994 HTS in 1999 FY-99 Models Development Program for COG/TPB Travel Models, Draft report, June 30, 1999. Used in Ver. 2, 2.1, and 2.2 travel models Example shown here: HBW 6

Methodology Estimated using unweighted data (in this case, 2007 HTS) We plan also to compare with estimation using weighted data Trip rates developed by dividing the number of sampled trips in each cell by the corresponding number of sampled households Initial trip rates computed were reviewed and checked for logic and consistency. Which led to a manual adjustment of some rates ( smoothing ), as deemed necessary. Such adjustments are common given that household sample sizes in some cells are low and may yield unreasonable rates, in comparison to the rates of adjacent cells with larger samples. Cells associated with low income levels and high family sizes, for example, are usually under-represented in travel surveys 7

Methodology Example, HBW, initial rates Income Sub Level HH Size 0-Veh 1-Veh 2-Veh 3+Veh Total 00k - 50k 1-PSN 0.40 0.59 0.61 0.72 0.54 2-PSN 0.67 0.78 1.16 1.40 0.97 3-PSN 0.89 1.44 1.81 1.81 1.53 4+PSN 0.90 1.76 2.16 2.62 1.97 Sub-Total 0.48 0.73 1.27 1.64 0.84 50k-100k 1-PSN 0.98 1.00 0.99 0.85 1.00 2-PSN 1.57 1.29 1.35 1.46 1.36 3-PSN 2.00 1.68 1.94 2.16 1.95 4+PSN 1.00 1.76 2.01 2.62 2.20 Sub-Total 1.13 1.14 1.53 1.98 1.42 100k-150k 1-PSN 1.33 1.03 1.11 0.76 1.05 2-PSN 2.00 1.77 1.77 1.87 1.80 3-PSN 0.00 1.38 2.05 2.46 2.15 4+PSN 3.00 1.78 2.00 2.63 2.23 Sub-Total 1.64 1.32 1.84 2.28 1.82 > 150k 1-PSN 1.25 0.89 1.00 0.64 0.91 2-PSN 1.40 2.07 1.84 1.97 1.90 3-PSN 0.00 1.48 2.30 2.88 2.55 4+PSN 0.00 1.95 2.20 2.91 2.49 Sub-Total 1.31 1.49 1.95 2.48 2.06 TOTAL 0.72 1.05 1.69 2.20 1.49 There are many dimensions to review We look for cases where the values do not monotonically increase It is easier to see when the data is graphed in two dimensions (next two slides) 8

Methodology Initial and smoothed rates, HBW HBW trip production rates as a function of HH size and vehs. avail. Before smoothing: Purple line (3+ veh. HHs) crosses other lines Blue line (0 veh. HHs) is kinked After smoothing: Purple line no longer crosses others Blue line is smoothed Un-Weighted Household Trip Rates Un-Weighted Household Trip Rates 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 HBW TRIP PRODUCTION INTIAL RATES RATES By Household Size & Vehicle Available 3+ Veh 2-Veh 1-Veh 1-PSN 2-PSN 3-PSN 4+PSN HOUSEHOLD SIZE HBW TRIP PRODUCTION SMOOTHED RATES By Household Size & Vehicle Available 1-PSN 2-PSN 3-PSN 4+PSN Household Size 0-Veh 3+ Veh 2-Veh 1-Veh 0-Veh 9

Methodology Initial and smoothed rates, HBW HBW trip production rates as a function of Vehs. avail. and HH size Before smoothing: Red line (2-psn HHs) crosses other lines Blue line (1-psn HHs) is not monotonically increasing After smoothing: Red line no longer crosses others Blue line is now monotonically increasing Un-Weighted Household Trip Rates Un-Weighted Household Trip Rates 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 HBW TRIP PRODUCTION INTIAL RATES RATES By Vehicle Available & Household Size 0-Veh 1-Veh 2-Veh 3+ Veh VEHICLES AVAILABLE HBW TRIP PRODUCTION SMOOTHED RATES By Vehicle Available & Household Size 4+PSN 3-PSN 2-PSN 1-PSN 0-Veh 1-Veh 2-Veh 3+ Veh VEHICLES AVAILABLE 4+PSN 3-PSN 2-PSN 1-PSN 10

Adjusted trip rates (total person trips, motorized and non-motorized) HBW, adjusted trip rates (total person trips, motorized and non-motorized) Income Sub Level HH Size 0-Veh 1-Veh 2-Veh 3+Veh Total 00k - 50k 1-PSN 0.40 0.59 0.61 0.72 0.54 2-PSN 0.67 0.78 1.16 1.40 0.97 3-PSN 0.89 1.44 1.81 1.81 1.53 4+PSN 0.90 1.76 1.76 2.62 1.82 Sub-Total 0.48 0.73 1.22 1.64 0.83 50k-100k 1-PSN 0.96 1.00 0.99 0.85 0.99 2-PSN 0.67 1.29 1.35 1.46 1.33 3-PSN 1.00 1.68 1.94 2.16 1.95 4+PSN 1.00 1.76 2.01 2.62 2.20 Sub-Total 0.89 1.14 1.53 1.98 1.41 100k-150k 1-PSN 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.11 1.03 2-PSN 1.70 1.77 1.77 1.87 1.79 3-PSN 1.70 1.77 2.05 2.46 2.19 4+PSN 1.75 2.00 2.00 2.63 2.24 Sub-Total 1.30 1.36 1.83 2.29 1.82 > 150k 1-PSN 1.03 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 2-PSN 2.00 2.07 1.84 1.97 1.90 3-PSN 1.70 2.07 2.30 2.88 2.60 4+PSN 2.00 2.20 2.50 2.91 2.66 Sub-Total 1.40 1.66 2.03 2.49 2.12 TOTAL 0.65 1.07 1.69 2.20 1.49 Notes: 1) Estimated with unweighted trips 2) Includes smoothing, i.e., some cells values adjusted to ensure logical and consistent values from cell to cell HBS, adjusted trip rates (total person trips, motorized and non-motorized) Income Sub Level HH Size 0-Veh 1-Veh 2-Veh 3+Veh Total 00k - 50k 1-PSN 0.59 0.64 0.66 0.66 0.63 2-PSN 0.82 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.10 3-PSN 0.96 1.38 1.38 1.38 1.32 4+PSN 0.96 1.34 1.76 1.76 1.53 Sub-Total 0.66 0.82 1.16 1.25 0.88 50k-100k 1-PSN 0.58 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.66 2-PSN 0.86 1.28 1.33 1.33 1.30 3-PSN 0.96 0.96 1.67 1.67 1.51 4+PSN 0.96 1.57 2.08 2.08 2.01 Sub-Total 0.66 0.85 1.44 1.62 1.19 100k-150k 1-PSN 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.67 0.68 2-PSN 1.24 1.27 1.31 1.31 1.30 3-PSN 0.96 1.59 1.59 1.67 1.62 4+PSN 1.50 1.65 2.13 2.08 2.08 Sub-Total 0.92 0.98 1.53 1.67 1.43 > 150k 1-PSN 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 2-PSN 1.24 1.27 1.31 1.38 1.32 3-PSN 1.24 1.71 1.59 1.70 1.66 4+PSN 1.50 2.23 2.40 2.42 2.40 Sub-Total 0.97 1.18 1.58 1.77 1.58 TOTAL 0.68 0.88 1.47 1.65 1.24 Notes: 1) Estimated with unweighted trips 2) Includes smoothing, i.e., some cells values adjusted to ensure logical and consistent values from cell to cell 11

Adjusted trip rates (total person trips, motorized and non-motorized) HBO, adjusted trip rates (total person trips, motorized and non-motorized) Income Sub Level HH Size 0-Veh 1-Veh 2-Veh 3+Veh Total 00k - 50k 1-PSN 0.78 0.92 1.12 1.12 0.90 2-PSN 0.78 1.61 2.04 2.04 1.71 3-PSN 1.61 2.93 2.93 2.93 2.75 4+PSN 1.61 3.71 3.71 4.88 3.70 Sub-Total 0.85 1.30 2.20 2.70 1.46 50k-100k 1-PSN 0.78 0.92 1.14 1.14 0.94 2-PSN 0.78 2.10 2.10 2.23 2.08 3-PSN 1.23 3.79 3.79 3.79 3.78 4+PSN 2.25 6.44 6.44 6.44 6.41 Sub-Total 0.82 1.58 3.10 3.93 2.49 100k-150k 1-PSN 0.90 0.93 1.14 1.14 0.97 2-PSN 1.61 1.97 1.97 1.97 1.96 3-PSN 2.50 3.79 3.79 3.79 3.79 4+PSN 2.50 6.44 7.34 7.34 7.28 Sub-Total 1.23 1.76 3.66 4.41 3.35 > 150k 1-PSN 0.90 0.93 1.14 1.14 0.98 2-PSN 1.61 1.97 1.99 1.97 1.98 3-PSN 2.50 4.81 3.88 4.81 4.45 4+PSN 2.50 6.40 6.40 7.63 6.94 Sub-Total 1.18 2.14 3.25 4.45 3.47 TOTAL 0.88 1.55 3.21 4.16 2.63 Notes: 1) Estimated with unweighted trips 2) Includes smoothing, i.e., some cells values adjusted to ensure logical and consistent values from cell to cell NHW, adjusted trip rates (total person trips, motorized and non-motorized) Income Sub Level HH Size 0-Veh 1-Veh 2-Veh 3+Veh Total 00k - 50k 1-PSN 0.28 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.32 2-PSN 0.27 0.29 0.39 0.39 0.34 3-PSN 0.35 0.63 0.63 0.67 0.60 4+PSN 0.30 0.63 0.63 0.91 0.65 Sub-Total 0.28 0.36 0.44 0.55 0.37 50k-100k 1-PSN 0.28 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.69 2-PSN 0.27 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.76 3-PSN 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.95 0.87 4+PSN 0.83 0.83 0.88 1.05 0.94 Sub-Total 0.30 0.75 0.80 0.91 0.77 100k-150k 1-PSN 0.28 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.91 2-PSN 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 3-PSN 0.97 1.00 1.15 1.15 1.13 4+PSN 0.98 1.04 1.04 1.33 1.15 Sub-Total 0.56 0.97 1.02 1.16 1.03 > 150k 1-PSN 0.79 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 2-PSN 0.79 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 3-PSN 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.37 1.32 4+PSN 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.43 1.33 Sub-Total 0.79 1.09 1.17 1.28 1.19 TOTAL 0.31 0.67 0.91 1.07 0.81 Notes: 1) Estimated with unweighted trips 2) Includes smoothing, i.e., some cells values adjusted to ensure logical and consistent values from cell to cell 12

Adjusted trip rates (total person trips, motorized and non-motorized) NHO, adjusted trip rates (total person trips, motorized and non-motorized) Income Sub Level HH Size 0-Veh 1-Veh 2-Veh 3+Veh Total 00k - 50k 1-PSN 0.56 0.67 0.84 0.96 0.65 2-PSN 0.61 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.14 3-PSN 0.74 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.15 4+PSN 1.15 1.15 1.50 1.50 1.34 Sub-Total 0.59 0.83 1.19 1.24 0.88 50k-100k 1-PSN 0.56 0.67 0.84 1.03 0.69 2-PSN 0.61 1.22 1.22 1.48 1.24 3-PSN 0.74 1.45 1.45 1.60 1.50 4+PSN 1.15 1.49 2.14 2.45 2.17 Sub-Total 0.58 0.86 1.39 1.80 1.20 100k-150k 1-PSN 0.56 0.67 0.84 1.03 0.71 2-PSN 0.95 1.22 1.29 1.48 1.31 3-PSN 1.00 1.45 1.45 1.60 1.51 4+PSN 1.15 1.49 2.15 2.45 2.23 Sub-Total 0.73 0.94 1.52 1.85 1.45 > 150k 1-PSN 0.56 0.67 0.84 1.03 0.72 2-PSN 0.95 1.22 1.53 1.60 1.51 3-PSN 1.00 1.45 1.53 1.60 1.57 4+PSN 1.49 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 Sub-Total 0.71 1.11 1.72 1.85 1.66 TOTAL 0.60 0.88 1.47 1.79 1.26 Notes: 1) Estimated with unweighted trips 2) Includes smoothing, i.e., some cells values adjusted to ensure logical and consistent values from cell to cell All purposes combined, adjusted trip rates (total psn trips, mot. & non-mot.) Income Sub Level HH Size 0-Veh 1-Veh 2-Veh 3+Veh Total 00k - 50k 1-PSN 2.60 3.16 3.57 3.80 3.04 2-PSN 3.15 5.03 5.95 6.19 5.26 3-PSN 4.55 7.60 7.97 8.01 7.35 4+PSN 4.92 8.58 9.36 11.68 9.04 Sub-Total 2.87 4.04 6.22 7.38 4.42 50k-100k 1-PSN 3.15 3.99 4.36 4.41 3.97 2-PSN 3.19 6.67 6.78 7.28 6.72 3-PSN 4.76 8.72 9.68 10.17 9.60 4+PSN 6.19 12.10 13.55 14.65 13.75 Sub-Total 3.25 5.18 8.25 10.24 7.05 100k-150k 1-PSN 3.45 4.26 4.64 4.90 4.31 2-PSN 6.47 7.20 7.32 7.61 7.34 3-PSN 7.13 9.60 10.02 10.67 10.25 4+PSN 7.88 12.63 14.66 15.84 14.99 Sub-Total 4.74 6.01 9.55 11.38 9.09 > 150k 1-PSN 4.08 4.51 4.89 5.08 4.60 2-PSN 6.59 7.65 7.79 8.03 7.83 3-PSN 7.70 11.31 10.56 12.36 11.59 4+PSN 8.75 14.55 15.02 16.85 15.79 Sub-Total 5.05 7.18 9.74 11.84 10.03 TOTAL 3.12 5.05 8.75 10.88 7.43 Notes: 1) Estimated with unweighted trips 2) Includes smoothing, i.e., some cells values adjusted to ensure logical and consistent values from cell to cell 13

Comparison with 1994 Observed rates Average Trip Production Rates, daily trips per HH (derived from un-weighted survey data) Pct 1994 2007 Diff Purp. HTS HTS (07/94) HBW 1.85 1.49-20% HBS 0.88 1.21 37% HBO 2.88 2.62-9% NHB 2.13 2.08-2% TOTAL 7.74 7.40-4% Notes: 1) For 1994 HTS, HBW is total person trips, but non-work is only motorized person trips 2) For 2007 HTS, All trip purposes are total person trips, i.e., motorized and nonmotorized together 3) For comparison purposes with 1994, 2007 NHW & NHO have been added to get one rate for NHB (2.08) Only HBW has tot. psn. trips for both 1994 & 2007 Drop in HBW trip rate of 20% Overall drop of 4% Possible causes More retired people Increased telecommuting Increased trip chaining Increased use of social networking web sites 14

Model applied to 64 strata 15

Summary and conclusions Cross classification trip s developed using 2007/2009 HH Travel Survey for five trip purposes (HBW, HBS, HBO, NHW, NHO), total person trips for all five Compared to the last time the models were estimated using the 1994 HTS, trip rates are down, with the exception of HBS (could be due to methodological differences) Drop in trip rates echoes findings from R. Griffiths on the 2007 HTS and also national trends (e.g., David T. Hartgen and Elizabeth San Jose, Costs and Trip Rates of Recent Household Travel Surveys, November 11, 2009, pp 9-10). A technical memo is being prepared Next steps We plan also to compare with estimation using weighted data In the past, we have needed to apply a factor of about 1.5 to non-work trip rates, due to underreporting of trip, to ensure proper assigned VMT (issue of underreporting to be addressed) 16